UConn's Dan Hurley, State Coaches Weigh In On G League Option, FBI Probe Into NCAA Corruption

College basketball prospects will soon have another option, and the coaches a new obstacle, in recruiting. The NBA plans to offer 18-year-olds the chance to make $125,000 in its developmental G League.

“Long term, we’re on a dangerous level with kids and education,” said UHart men’s basketball coach John Gallagher, following a panel discussion of the state’s Division I coaches Monday at the Golf Club of Avon. The event, hosted by ESPN’s Seth Greenberg, benefitted the V Foundation and the John Saunders Grant for Pediatric Cancer Research and provided a lively discussion of timely topics as the season nears.

“If a kid leaves at 18,” Gallagher said, “and doesn’t make it, is the G League going to pay for four years of education? Then I’d think it’s a good idea, but is the NBA going to be willing to pay for four years of education for every basketball player that doesn’t make it? If they say yes to that I’d be shocked, because you’re dealing with hundreds of millions of dollars. ... I’m not fan of anything where education is taken out of play ”

Although coaches generally agreed the current system, in which many of the best prospects go to college for only one year before being NBA Draft eligible, needs to change, no one was ready to fully embrace the G League proposal. Here’s how the coaches weighed in, topic by topic:

Quinnipiac coach Baker Dunleavy thinks the proposal to pay 18-year-olds $125,000 to play in the G League is a step in the right direction, but there are issues to consider. (Patrick Raycraft / Hartford Courant)

G League Opinions

Yale’s James Jones: “I just don’t want kids to only look at the short term. That’s the problem I see, when you look at the short-term gain — one year, $125,000. And if you don’t make it in three years, you’re out. I’m worried about the young men the rest of their lives. Education is such an important thing, and not being able to get an education is really tough.”

UConn’s Dan Hurley: “Me, I don’t see that as a great option, especially as we continue to move forward and do as much as we can for our student-athletes at the college level. If we can figure out a way to think progressively about how to make their experience better at the college level, it’s so much better an environment to develop holistically in terms of the next 40 years of their lives instead of the next six. So you’re in the G League three or four years and it doesn’t work out. You go overseas for two years and you try to hang on, and now you’re going to go back and try to get your college education? Now, you’re going to start the second act in your life in your mid-30s. It could potentially be setting these guys up for more failure.”

Quinnipiac’s Baker Dunleavy: “I think it’s getting closer to what we need to be doing, which is creating alternatives for kids who really just want to monetize their potential, that 1 percent of the 1 percent that can sign a big-time shoe deal right now. Give them the option to do that. I agree with a lot of people who are talking about it — kids would still choose to come to college for a year because of the lifestyle and the exposure of playing on TV. And playing against 18-year-olds is better than playing against 28-year-olds in terms of how you get exposed. I think it’s the right step, we’re closer to the NBA opening their doors. There has to be an alternative to that kid who just wants to go earn a living. I think the model that makes the most sense is in European soccer, they have these clubs, the kids are educated, they’re paid, they’re trained, but it’s very organized and there is a lot of money put into it. If the NBA’s going to do that, they’ve got to put a lot of money into these G League teams.”

Greenberg: “The NBA is trying to find a bridge for kids who don’t want to go to college. That’s great. My concern with all this is, $125,000 is $75,000 [after taxes], it’s a one-year deal. If that player has a bad year, where does he go back to? Where is the support system? If he goes back to the G League, they’re not going to pay $125,000 the second year. … It’s not well thought out.”

Coach Hurley takes part in the Connecticut Basketball Tip-off Breakfast with the other six Division I coaches in the state. pic.twitter.com/ELaeUaZhLi

On The FBI Probe

During the panel discussion, coaches discussed the ongoing FBI probe, and trial, regarding bribery and fraud in college basketball recruiting:

Sacred Heart’s Anthony Latina: “At first, shock. Why does the FBI care about college basketball? There are so few schools that are actually involved. It’s obviously a problem, at the highest level it’s such a business. Hopefully it’s relatively smaller in numbers.”

Central Connecticut’s Donyell Marshall: “Being a former All-American [at UConn], one thing I can say is, I’ve never been a part of that. But it’s something that’s been going on for a long time so it really wasn’t a shock, it was more of a shock that it took such a long time to come out. It’s a difficult thing to get a handle on, but you have to some way or somehow.”

Hurley: “What insulates me from those conversations is my background, who my dad [Bob Sr.] is, his reputation. I just don’t understand, if you pay a kid, if you’re part of a staff that pays a kid, I just don’t understand — how can you then coach him? I don’t know how you can then set the standard for them to live up to every day if you sold your soul to get them.”

Advertisement

Fairfield’s Sydney Johnson: “I don’t think it’s all of college basketball, but obviously there is something going on at the elite level and kids are trying to make decisions, whether to invest in themselves long term, four years, or take the money and run. With college athletics there is this pull of trying to develop young men and transform their lives, and the money that’s in the game. Something’s got to give.”

CCSU coach Donyell Marshall stands apart from the crowd when it comes to analytics in college basketball. (John Woike | jwoike@courant.com)

Analytics

Marshall played the role of old-schooler when it came to analytics. As the coaches discussed, modern thinking is to emphasize 3-pointers and layups over the mid-range jumper as a more efficient approach to scoring.

Marshall: “Personally, I hate analytics. Maybe because I played, it drives me crazy. Even the plus-minus thing. At the end of the game you can have all zeroes in the stats and your plus-minus is plus-12 because the four around you have done a great job of getting the score up. It’s one of those things we don’t really look at, we just go out there and try to score the most points.”